Strunk v. New York State Board of ElectionsStrunk v. New York State Board of Elections
Ordered that the order dated December 9, 2013, is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiff‘s motion which was for leave to amend the complaint. The plaintiff‘s proposed amendments were patently devoid of merit (see Reyes v Brinks Global Servs. USA, Inc., 112 AD3d 805 [2013]; Torres v Louzoun Enters., Inc., 105 AD3d 945 [2013]).
The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the plaintiff‘s motion which was, in effect, to vacate an order dated March 29, 2013, which, after a hearing, determined that he engaged in frivolous conduct and directed him to pay costs to certain defendants and a sanction to the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection. The new evidence submitted by the plaintiff would not have changed the outcome (see
The plaintiff‘s remaining contentions are without merit.
Skelos, J.P., Dillon, Miller and LaSalle, JJ., concur.